This is the toy advertisement of ToysRus from Sweden. As you can see it is quite unusual if it is compared with the other ads from other countries. Usually boys play with nerf guns and girls look after dolls, but that is not the case in this image. On the contrary, here we can see that the girl is using the toy gun and she has a competitive/aggressive impression on her face, which we normally see on a boy, and the boy who is taking care of the baby doll has mellow impression which we usually see on a girl. In the last image we can see both a boy and a girl playing with a house with Barbie dolls in it and even though we could call it a “girls toy” by the pink color scheme the toy has, both children seems to have fun playing with it.

We all think this ad is strange, including myself, but why do we think it is? Is it really that strange for a girl to play with a “boys toy” or vice versa? Well, I think this should not be the case. Children should be able to play with whatever they are interested in. Because of the usual ads on these childrens toys there is a perception of boys should play with some certain toys and girls should with some other. Because of this perception those kids who want to play with some other toys that are not designated to their social group are being bullied by thier friends and people surrounding them.

Leanne Etheridge has written an article named “Who Gets to Play?” focusing on LetToysBeToys research, which pointed at gender segregation.I thought that this example, which is actually not a toy example, is an astonishing one to support Etheridge’s article.Although gender segregation has become a normalized fact in many different areas, there are some different ways to exemplify this. But if we look at children and baby products, it is more surprising to see such differential examples. These ones, which are made for babies, are labeled as “boys walking rein and harness/girls walking rein and harness”. There were many specific examples like this one, in “Who Gets to Play?”, and there were just as strange as this. When toys or other products for children have different color options, I believe that it’s just fine. But if they are labeled according to their colors, this causes gender segregation.

If it is exactly the same product, what is the point at putting different logos -train driver vs. little cupcake- to limit both parents and childrens choices? When parents see that “boys/girls” label, they generally don’t even think of buying the blue one for a girl. There should be no segregation or limits while producing and consuming products for children. Otherwise when they grow old, this mentality grows with them as well. Gender segregation in children might seem as an harmless thing which basically differentiates colors and little features but it is the first step to gender segregation between adults. Children should grow up knowing that they are equal, therefore they should be treated equally beginning from childhood.

We are facing a problem which in my opinion makes people more judgemental and that problem is gender segregation. The idea of girls should have/ play with girly things and boys should have/play with manly things, is put into people’s minds that girls cannot play with boys toys and boys cannot play with boys toys. If such an idea is adopted, judging the kids who are not playing with the ´´appropriate´´ toys is inevitable. This can result in bullying, having a low self esteem, and narrowing the kids horizon. Marketing is not really helpful when comes to this topic. I cannot think of any item that is not just only for boys or only for girls. Every single item that a child uses is either for girls or boys. Clothes, toys, games, milk cartons, even water bottles. The advertisements of these products shows/ tells you how a girl and a boy should be, and what they are suppose to like. The company Nestle has designed new water bottles for boys and girls. While the bottles for girls have Barbies on it, the bottles for boys have Hot Wheels. Hayat the water company did the same thing. Girls had Frozen characters and boys had Star Wars characters. I cloud understands if shampoos and skin care products were made for men and women separately but water is the simplest and maybe the most gender neutralist thing. Even something as simple as a water bottle reinforces the gender binary. If kids are intentionally or unintentionally taught that such a binary exists the toys will not just be toys. They will be boys toys and girls toys. Games will be for boys or girls only. Even water will have gender, and the imagination of children will slowly fade away because they are so limited.

Toothpaste. We all use it to maintain our oral hygiene. It is such common item to purchase amongst both males and females that it would most probably appear bizarre if it were to be assigned a gender. This arises the question of if not gendered for adults, then why for kids? If you have roamed between supermarket aisles long enough you most likely have realized that toothpastes do not only vary in function and flavor but also vary in gender. As surprising as it is, there are toothpastes marketed separately towards boys and girls. What differentiates these products from one another is solely their packaging. Although it does not specify on the packing whether the product is meant for a certain gender, the colors and graphics says it all. When aimed for girls, a bright pink is the color of choice whilst when aimed for boys darker yet vibrant colors like blue and deep reds are used. In this specific case, Colgate, demonstrates the infamous Barbie and Lightning Mcqueen from the Pixar Animations’ Cars on their packaging for kids’ toothpaste. When advertised towards adults, the emphasis is made on the properties of the product since those are the qualities sought after by adults. However when marketed towards children the aim is to get them to brush their teeth through identifying with the showcased characters and the message they endorse. In this case, the endorsement of the gender-binary qualities is performed via well-known characters. Whilst a race care is deemed suitable for boys, where speed and competitiveness are the outstanding features, as doll is seen fit for girls with concepts of beauty, caregiving and compassion are brought forward.

This is an ad made in Sweden for a pretend self-care toys made for children. Different than its counterparts we see a boy which seems to be having fun while playing with this particular toy. Nowadays toys like these are being marketed only for girls and to reinforce the idea it is hard to see an ad without girls wearing all pink playing with their girl friends only and talking about fashion, beauty and so on. In his article Leanne Etheridge points out that when you look at the overall picture same concepts such as beauty, fashion are continuously targeted for girls and boys cannot play with these kind of toys because they are made for girls. Same thing exists for girls in areas like race cars action figures. Companies and their marketing departments are intentionally creating binaries so that they can sell the same toys many times only by adding artificial gender profiled features on them. The harmful thing is that the children face with this gender separating approach starting from when they were babies and after some point this concept slowly turns into being reality. It seems like this separation is natural and it is supposed to be in that way. Getting rid of this perception is almost impossible after a certain point so the intervention must be made in early stages. The children should be allowed to play with anything they want and get to know themselves. That is way this ad is a small but significant step to tackle this problem. There are many men who choose to get a job in sectors that are so called too feminine for them. If that sector is suitable for them they should be allowed to discover their interest in early ages and not be ashamed of their choice. If the number of ads such as this one rises it would be positive development for society changing their false understanding of the segregated gender order.

Advertisements

]]>https://sosc111.wordpress.com/2018/03/18/toys-and-gender-binary/feed/0sosc 5ulasbesoksosc 5Gender Neutral Clothinghttps://sosc111.wordpress.com/2018/03/17/gender-neutral-clothing/
https://sosc111.wordpress.com/2018/03/17/gender-neutral-clothing/#respondSat, 17 Mar 2018 19:30:27 +0000http://sosc111.wordpress.com/?p=6131In “Who Gets to Play?: What Do Toy Ads on UK TV Tell Children about Boys’ and Girls’ Play?,” Leanne Etheridge points out a study which shows how gender segregation can affect children of all genders in a negative way. From the day they are born children are exposed to different gender stereotypes like what to wear, what to play with, or what colour to prefer. This has drastic results because telling boys and girls to be different can influence their developement process. It can lead to problems in learning, communication, self-confidence or be exposed to bullying. But, there are brands which are turning to be gender-neutral. For example, Abercrombie and Fitch offers a gender-neutral option for children between 5-14 in response to a costumer demand. It offers an “everybody collection”, featuring many styles. The sizes are the same regardless of gender and instead of seeing a shirt labeled as “for boys” or “for girls”, you see it as “unisex”. In this picture you can see a boy wearing a pink sweatshirt and a girl wearing an overall. The clothes which were supposed to be for the opposite sex are now for every gender. It is positive to see that a big clothing company like Abercrombie and Fitch is supporting gender neutrality but it is one of the few clothing brands which is doing it. Therefore, it will take more time to commit more companies (not only for clothing) to support this movement. But, we before that we should ask ourselves some questions. Is gender neutral clothing becoming important because the companies want to be gender neutral?, or is it because parents are putting more and more pressure on companies to be gender-neutral? Is profit playing a role? Regaring A&B, the company offered these clothes because of a parent. Maybe, if no one mentioned this matter it would still remain the same. All in all, here is an imbalance in gender and children are still facing a harmful gender binary.

Advertisements

]]>https://sosc111.wordpress.com/2018/03/17/gender-neutral-clothing/feed/0abercrombie-kids-630x400gpekerkanhttps://sosc111.wordpress.com/2018/03/16/6123/
https://sosc111.wordpress.com/2018/03/16/6123/#respondFri, 16 Mar 2018 14:37:16 +0000http://sosc111.wordpress.com/?p=6123Limiting our children’s interests about toys leads children separation according to their genders. If you are a girl, you are expected to play with dolls, nurturing and relationships, makeup​ and so. But ıf you are a boy, you are expected to play with cars, guns, swords, video games and so by society. Besides parents’ limitation, also commercials play a big factor in​ gender discrimination about toys. In general, ıf a toy is associated with a boy, in a ​commercial you can only see a boy who introduces the product. It’s the same for girls and girls’ toys commercials too. Gender inequality is learned by time, so making such discrimination to our children in their early age can harm their gender binary in time. Why unisex toys are less than detached toys according to their gender ? or why do girls play passive roles when they are playing with their toys and boys play active roles when they are playing with their toys? Such questions have one solution we should stop teaching and guiding our children about which toys he/she should play. We buy toys regardless of their color, categorizing​ under the name of girl toy and boy toy we should just evaluate toys according to their function. Not only in toys, but also gender discrimination is everywhere. For instance, books which are helpful to develop our wisdom. Even in books have discriminative features. The book there are two sides and each side​​s is for one gender, one of the sides is for girls and the other is for boys which are​ called ‘Only Girls Should Read This Book’ and the same book cover for boys. It’s such ridiculous for both genders​.​

Advertisements

]]>https://sosc111.wordpress.com/2018/03/16/6123/feed/0nilsuatalaIMG_4525“These Don’t Belong Together”https://sosc111.wordpress.com/2018/03/15/these-dont-belong-together/
https://sosc111.wordpress.com/2018/03/15/these-dont-belong-together/#respondThu, 15 Mar 2018 18:46:54 +0000http://sosc111.wordpress.com/?p=6121Human beings, especially children get influenced by their surroundings. Since children’s surroundings mostly include parents and relatives, they mostly get influenced by them. Children are not born with stereotypes but are being taught.

People behave differently to their daughters and sons and this is the ultimate start-point of the “stereotype” problem. They dress girls in pink and boys in blue since the day they are born. Then as the children grow older, they are given the toys that are “appropriate” for their sex. Their birthday presents are usually gendered as well. If you are buying a present for a little boy, it won’t occur to you to buy a Barbie or a cooking set if he is old enough. But rather you would tend to buy soldier dolls or toy trucks. This segregation lasts after childhood too. When children become young-adults/adolescents, girls usually have a harder time to go out and have fun, compared to boys. As if they are supposed to be supervised or should stay at home and maybe even help with the housework when boys aren’t expected to do so. Because when it comes to boys, it is taught that it is okay for them to be messy and reckless.

Audi has a campaign called “Let’s Change the Game”. The commercial starts as if it was a toy commercial. It shows a market where there are two rows full of toys, one colored pink and the other colored blue. As the camera comes closer, it is seen that there are Barbie dolls on the pink side and vehicles on the blue side. As the market closes, the toys become alive just like they do in Toy Story and Night at the Museum. The pretty doll that is dressed in a pink dress goes to the blue side an Audi’s door is opens, not the driver seat’s door obviously. But then, our little doll doesn’t want to sit next to the driver but wants to drive the car herself. So she jumps in and starts driving. What she sees is that Barbie dolls are playing football and soldier toys are drinking tea on the pink side. When the opening time of the market comes, all the toys rush back to their original places but our Barbie in the Audi can’t make it to their place, so it remains on the floor of the market. A boy enters the toy section and likes the car and the driver inside, he tells his mom that he wants to buy those toys and his mother responds; “But honey, these don’t belong together.” and pulls the Barbie out of the car and puts it in the pink side. As his mother leaves, he grabs the Barbie back and smiles happily. It appears on the screen: “Playing, just like driving, shouldn’t be a matter of gender. Let’s change the game!”

We see in the commercial that when there is no one to interrupt, no toys are gendered. Gendering is a problem of adults and it spreads like a disease to their children and their surroundings. The toys don’t see themselves as they belong to one gender only either.

Advertisements

]]>https://sosc111.wordpress.com/2018/03/15/these-dont-belong-together/feed/0esinapaydinGenders of Productshttps://sosc111.wordpress.com/2018/03/14/genders-of-products/
https://sosc111.wordpress.com/2018/03/14/genders-of-products/#respondWed, 14 Mar 2018 21:31:45 +0000http://sosc111.wordpress.com/?p=6119Many people claim that genders are only biological. However, as Dr. Leanne Etheridge discussed in “Who Gets to Play? What Do Toy Ads on UK TV Tell Children About Boys’ and Girls’ Play?”, a big part of gender roles is learned. Society and the community we live in has some gender norms about the gender performativity. These norms can be observed in many areas such as toys, clothing, career life, marriage and more. The roles of genders in society and the rules about them are taught to people from very early ages. This is the reason why I have focused on an advert about computers for not children as a whole but girls and boys.

This product is covered and advertised differently for girls and boys even if both computers have the same quality and prize. The computer for “girls” is covered with pink flowers and there is a typical blond barbie girl on the screen. Computer’s extra product is a barbie camera which is -again- differing from boy’s. On the other hand, computer for boys is colored full of blue and yellow. It has some flames on the design and we can see a race car on screen. The extra product of the computer for boys is a steering wheel and gas&brake which are blue too. These were some obvious facts but there are some ideas hidden behind these facts.

This advert implies three main ideas to children about gender roles in society. Firstly, some colors are matched with certain genders. Pink and pastel colors point to girls while blue and bright colors indicate boys. This color-matching isn’t something new. The children are exposed to this idea since their birth. Secondly, flowers stand for “girl products” because girls should be more likely to interested in nature, rather than boys. Meanwhile, “boy products” are covered with flames which means that boys are interested in dangerous things and taking risks more than girls. Thirdly, the extra product of “computer for girls” is a digital camera which gives the idea that girls are interested in their look & appearance and taking photos. However, the extra product of “computer for boys” is a steering wheel that shows boys as fans of cars.

As a conclusion, adverts imply many ideas about gender roles and gender differentiation for boys and girls. Unfortunately, these ideas sharpen the disparity between roles of girls and boys.

Advertisements

]]>https://sosc111.wordpress.com/2018/03/14/genders-of-products/feed/0bilgnazelifaybilgChildren’s Toys and the Gender Dividehttps://sosc111.wordpress.com/2018/03/14/childrens-toys-and-the-gender-divide/
https://sosc111.wordpress.com/2018/03/14/childrens-toys-and-the-gender-divide/#respondWed, 14 Mar 2018 10:40:50 +0000http://sosc111.wordpress.com/?p=6114In “Who Gets to Play?: What Do Toy Ads on UK TV Tell Children about Boys’ and Girls’ Play?,” Leanne Etheridge cites a study which shows how gender segregation in marketing reinforces a strict gender binary in which boys are adventurous, active, and aggressive, while girls are passive, nurturing, and focused on physical appearance. Toys marketed mostly to boys include construction sets, action figures, and toy weapons, while toys marketed mostly to girls include dolls and glamour/grooming toys. What does this say about what we are taught to believe about gender roles, gender stereotypes, and gender difference? And why is it such a big deal? According to the “Let Toys Be Toys” campaign, such marketing teaches implied lessons about gender that might actually be harmful for both boys and girls, men and women. Who might it hurt if boys are taught that cooperation is a feminine, instead of a masculine, quality? And what might be the result of advertising geared towards girls that teaches that their primary concern should be their physical appearance and pleasing others?

According to Etheridge, our views concerning gender roles and gender difference are becoming more, instead of less, conservative, as reflected in toy advertising and marketing. But we can also see a reinforcement of this gender segregation happening in television shows, childrens books, and practically any other product marketed to children. And it is only becoming more pronounced. Note, for example, how depictions of the popular Care Bears characters have shifted from the more gender-neutral version of the 1980s to a much stricter gender binary:

STUDENTS: Choose one pop culture “artifact” (this might be an advertisement, a children’s book, cartoon, clothing line, product packaging, or anything else related to children and consumption) which you believe either challenges or reinforces a harmful gender binary. Justify your position with a brief analysis (250-500 words) of the item. I encourage you to think outside of the box on this one–you might also find examples which are exceptions to the rule! Categorize your post under “Children, Consumption, and Play,” and be sure to publish your post by Monday, March 19.

Advertisements

]]>https://sosc111.wordpress.com/2018/03/14/childrens-toys-and-the-gender-divide/feed/0Picture2annamcmurrayThe modern version of the "Care Bears"